The Dovekeepers (2015) User Reviews

Dumb women and predatory men

[GaelinW · 4/10 · 13 July 2020]

I never read the book so I don't know what the intention or full story was. (This version seems to exclude a lot). And I can forgive the lack to authenticity. (Blue eyed, flame haired Judean 2000 years ago? Yeah, right.) It's fictionalized history.

What's unforgivable is the the lack of likeable characters (except maybe the German slave and Josephus who was at least a realist/pragmatist.)

I'm all for love and romance, but come on! The women come across as dumb, weak, easily seduced and/or mean (scorned wives mad at mistresses). The men predatory when not just complete a-holes.

Perhaps it was the way this particular story was told, but what the Jews were fighting for wasn't really emphasized/shown. We see the Romans take revenge, but (based on the story here) they were attacked first. Revenge is what the Romans do. Sure, revolt/rebellion/dying for freedom is a topic of argument between Shirah and Josephus, but it's never made visceral for the viewer.

Ultimately, I didn't really care what happened to the Romans or the Jews. The only ones I felt bad for were the children with such lousy parents.

Was OK for a rainy day, surprised at all the sex.

[smilee_1 · 5/10 · 4 April 2015]

It was definitely not an action show ,but a drama, with much narration. Hard to follow at points and slow in others. I am glad I did not pay to see this at the movies , even Sam Neill was dry. Roma Downey & Mark Burnet take yet another step further away from presenting a good Christian story,( i.e. their Bible and A.D. stories toning down the divinity of Jesus and leaving out Satan claiming to such things because they wanted it family friendly, but this movie is not) full of fornication. I lost track of all the adultery ,out of wedlock sex and children born out of wedlock. Like a day time soap. Shame...but it is obvious they have plenty of "water" around...

Dovekeepers left all the good parts of the book out.

[vsmilack-17879 · 2/10 · 1 April 2015]

The book the Dovekeepers was interesting with much information about history. The movie is only sex and left all the information out. Also, the movie is very disjointed. I recommended this movie to friends and was embarrassed. What a total disappointment. Where were the scenes of of the destruction of the Temple, the hazards of traveling across the desert, that the person they were talking to was Josephus the great Historian, that Masada was built by Herod, the importance of the dovekeeping and sending of messages, who were the Essenes,where were the fields and what did they grow, what was the Mikveh, the explanations of the rituals done by Shira and her methods of holistic healing, etc. Where was all the information that was given in the book. We know about sex and lust but not about the history that was provided in the book. This movie removed the essence of the book leaving nothing of interest.

So disappointing!

[sarahbelle88 · 2/10 · 7 April 2015]

I read the book and loved it, I was hopeful for this adaptation to live up to the book... But no such luck. They left out one of the major characters entirely, one who actually narrates a 1/4 of the book, as well as many other important characters and events from the book. They didn't do justice to any of the characters' back-stories, leaving the viewers without any real understanding of the characters and their motivations. The book was a beautiful piece of historical fiction that told the story of strong, devout Jewish women and the things they did to survive the times and the conditions and the Roman siege. This miniseries was just a historically inaccurate soap opera.

Loved this two episode mini-series as a history buff

[dajonesholdstl · 7/10 · 2 April 2015]

This show aired March 31 & April 1st, 2015 on CBS: Having an interest in history and all things pertaining to the Bible, I was at first surprised by the way this story came to be - through 2 women survivors. Yes the 2 night idea made for a slow pace but that was to introduce you more fully to the characters which it accomplished very well. We all know that all the people killed themselves so that was a given but Roma Downey managed to flesh out the story so that we cared for these people and what happened to them. Historically speaking I often wonder how the people of the Bible actually thought and lived since we are so removed from that perspective today. Speaking of the main character and her potions: these are all herbal remedies however I was not sure sometimes if they were not something else - this was upsetting as it mixed Godly worship with witchcraft (white witchcraft). Maybe they did that or maybe they did not historically speaking. And there was too much emphasis on passion taking precious minutes that could have been used for the story. And last but not least, what happened to the babies - one in the womb & one living & being carried at the end when they are telling their story..? Did this story actually get written down in a Roman Library by a Jew as seen in the show? Overall, I liked the show, the costumes, the actors. Cons: commercial time between breaks was so long I could watch parts of another show. Am looking forward to Roma Downey's next efforts this Easter Sunday.

Harlequin romance TV Show

[bbriddell · 1/10 · 2 April 2015]

I watched because my family members were watching. We had just finished watching a good show; and I wanted to continue engaging in social time.

I stopped watching part 1 about 5 minutes from the end.

It may have had some kind of story and it seemed like other than the story being told was important to the Romans for posterity; I'm not sure why? This Romance Novel even went as far to tell the audience their formula; when the Roman tells them, "I use my head to think not my heart". So, men use their head and women use their heart. Seriously, pen to paper for this story back in this time frame? Moreover, typing on a keyboard today for this twaddle?

Women in bright outfits, like jewels in the desert. Handsome strapping men. Throw some magic/witchcraft in. I'm not sure if there were any Zombies in part two, they did have a ghost from the grave in part one.

They had the money, time, and everything else; so my conclusion is best summed up by Forest Gump, "Stupid is as stupid does."

A beautiful story with an equally beautiful cast

[televisionseriesreviews · 9/10 · 31 March 2015]

When I first heard that Revka was left out of this story, I was slightly disappointed having read the book by Alice Hoffman beforehand, but after watching only a few minutes of Night One it became clear that this mini-series is only inspired by the book, and although it has all other leading characters, Shirah, Aziza and Yael it does not follow the same pattern.

Night One begins with Shirah (Cote de Pablo) and shortly after Yael (Rachel Brosnahan) being interrogated by Josephus (Sam Neill). As the plot unfolds it soon becomes clear that Shirah and Yael are the only survivors remaining in Masada, and they are there to tell their story to Josephus who in exchange for the truth will grant them their life. As they begin relating each of their stories and describing how they entwine we are introduced to the other characters.

Yael describes the turbulent relationship she always had with her father Joseph Bar Elhanan (Manuel Cauchi), for causing the death of her own mother at birth. This is were we see the connection between a young Yael (Maia Attard) and Shirah, who is hired as her nursemaid. We then get a glimpse of Shirah's love interest, Eleazar Ben Ya'ir (Mido Hamada) who is married to another woman. Having committed adultery, Shirah who is pregnant with Eleazar's child is cast out of Jerusalem and sent to the desert to die.

Next we are introduced to Amram (Diego Boneta) who is Yael's brother. Yael describes how Amram together with another few warriors initiate an attack on the Romans who are trying to invade Jerusalem. The Romans rebel and at Flavius' (Sam Hazeldine) command begin killing all the jews. Yael and her father, who are soon followed by a large crowd decide to flee from Jerusalem which is now up in flames.

Shirah recounts how Sa'adallos (Andrei Claude), a wealthy and strong man from Moab saved her and the child, Aziza (Kathryn Prescott) after she was exiled. Sa'adallos married her and raised her child, Aziza as his own. Although later Shirah and Sa'adallos have a son together, Adir (Andre Agius), Sa'adallos decides to train Aziza to be an able warrior like himself. Despite of all the good that Sa'adallos has done, for which Shirah claims she was grateful,she decides to escape from the Moabite village, and together with Aziza and Adir returns to Jerusalem, believing that her fate is to be with Eleazar. Along their journey we discover that Aziza is in fact a girl, who has been disguised as a boy by her mother in order to protect her.

Meanwhile, Yael and her father continue their journey towards Masada, where they will reunite with Amram. Along the way a one of Amram's fellow Sicarii, Jachim Ben Simon (Luke Roberts) who is married to an older and frail looking woman, Sia (Marama Corlett) initiates a passionate affair with Yael.

Finally Yael and Josef arrive in Masada and are greeted by Amram. Shirah, Aziza and Yael begin working together in the Dovecote. An intimate relationship develops between Amram and Aziza, which Shirah disapproves of, while Yael seems to fall in love with a slave (Diarmaid Murtagh) named Wynn who is held captive in Masada.

As the Tenth Legion approaches and set camp right outside Masada, fear begins to spread amongst all the people. It becomes evident that the Romans are now too powerful to defeat, and rather than retreating and becoming slaves to the Romans, Eleazar orders a mass suicide.

This is a great story about love, betrayal, courage and fear, with a cast that is diverse and interesting to watch. The editing and SFX is impressive. The acting is also very good.

In the last scene, when their story reaches a climax, Shirah and Yael are set free by Josephus. Even before the credits begin rolling, I could only wonder where Shirah might go and what she will do, now that all the people in her life are dead, all except Sa'adallos actually, as I can only assume that Adir's life wasn't spared. Would she go back to Sa'adallos after what she did? That would be an interesting sequel to watch.

So bad it hurts.

[AdultAudienceMember · 1/10 · 31 March 2015]

I have suffered through about 15 minutes of this show. It is so wrong on so many levels. Red heads in the Middle East 2000 years ago? Ninja rebels? Looks like it was filmed in Southern California with folks off the street.

It is a cleanly swept Jerusalem that looks more like Disney's idea of the Holy Land. The dialog is stiff and forced. Some of the scenes sound more like therapy sessions that plot instruments.

Yes, I know. It's a fictionalized version of Masada. But it is so fictionalized as to be silly and boring at the same time.

But it is so pretty. Lots of lovely colors particularly in the freshly scrubbed laundry worn by the oppressed peoples.

Just a couple of nights ago we had to endure Killing Jesus, probably the lamest retelling of the Gospel ever. This is not as bad simply because it couldn't be.

But for anyone with even half a brain who knows anything about that historical period, the people of the times, and the story of the Jewish Rebellion, this is as close to reality as Friends is to Schindler's List.

Cote the GOAT (greatest of all time)

[Jeffronthi-950-543134 · 8/10 · 21 April 2020]

I'm not typically into these types of movies, but I will watch anything with Cote De Pablo in it. I would literally watch a movie with her standing in place.

Having said that, she did a great job, and this was well worth watching. Beautiful scenery.

Pretty picture but zzzzzzzzz

[IOBdennis · 2/10 · 8 April 2015]

I too am part of the large group who think this made-for-TV movie is a disaster. I lasted longer than most, however. I actually watched all but the last hour of Part 2. Eventually, I couldn't take more of the same thing. It was beautifully filmed, but the acting was so wooden, the story so dull. What was with Cote de Pablo? Was her expression painted on? And I think it is Mido Hamada who has one of the most forced smiles I have ever seen. Showin' off new choppers, Mido? Finally, Sam Neill was so disappointing in this role. But the character is such a boring one to begin with. I shouldn't fault the actor with simply delivering what was given. I found the way the story was presented to be thoroughly confusing. I couldn't get interested in the characters, and the minute I started to "get" one of them, the plot switched to another character, and I was out in the dark once again. Now, don't get me wrong. I like an "adult" drama, maybe even verging on soap opera, but this one is a prime example of poorly written, acted, and directed schlock. At the start of the last "love in the cistern" scene, I actually broke out laughing. And in one of them, the continuity was so bad, I grimaced: the actors kept flipping from left to right side of each other with absolutely no transition or movement whatsoever. Was this supposed to be some artsy filming? Because it looked kind of deliberate, or I should say, blatant. Didn't work for me. What was the point?

The Pigeonkeepers

[lawriter77 · 2/10 · 15 April 2015]

I was expecting so much more, though I knew nothing of the novel so I really had no idea what to expect. But after watching the first two episodes of A.D. from the same producers, it was a little jarring to watch a sexed-up desert soap opera with barely a token hint of the Jewish faith actually expressed, where all the heroines are sleeping with other women's husbands or mixing potions or killing Romans ("As the World Burns" ... "One Life to End" ... "All My Illegitimate Children" ... take your pick). The modern language was an unnecessary annoyance, and the insertion of a 21st-Century Western Liberal female perspective was noticeable throughout. (The women's perspective was the core of the story, of course. But it came across a little too "today" for me.)

Particularly disturbing was the adulterous witch successfully invoking the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob by name to call down rain and save herself from a mob execution so she could continue her affair with another woman's husband. I don't think so.

I recorded this and watched it over two nights while I did my taxes. One form of torture mitigating the other, I guess. Which one was which, I'm not sure at the moment.

I tried to watch it

[KenJoe · 1/10 · 31 March 2015]

The information I had before trying to watch this sounded good, sounded like it would be quite interesting. Unfortunately the program itself was amazingly boring. I admit, I did not watch the entire show, I gave up watching after 25 minutes. I would have quit sooner but I was hoping it would find some energy and take off.

Every scene just plodded along, the times when there should have been the strongest of emotions, there were just frozen masks of indifference. As most, at times, a slight knowing smile, or a little frown of anger (I think that is what it was).

Maybe it got better later on in the show, I just could not hang on anymore. It should have been a great story, I think, but not told and represented this way.

I doubt too many people will find this interesting enough to watch all the way through.

Trash

[bhkermit · 1/10 · 2 April 2015]

This was trash. I only watched the first night. I kept thinking this must get better. Nope. I should have given up on it improving. The message night one sends was that it is okay to have sex with married men.

I couldn't even figure out what the main plot of the movie was supposed to be about.

I also didn't understand the supernatural aspect. Where these just dreams or a guilty conscious.

I have not read the book. One review said the movie does not reflect the book. I would like to hear from others that have read the book. I would be tempted to give the book a try.

Inspired by the book but not based on it

[s_imdb-28 · 10/10 · 3 April 2015]

This is an exceptional piece of work actually. Its structure will undoubtedly not be received well by many as it is quite a daring "avant guard" method against the usual prime TV drama format. The filmmakers managed to tell a story through an interview, making the story easier to analyze and probably more cost efficiently had it been a full dramatic narrative which I am guessing would have been too cost prohibitive, relegating this story to just a book. There is lots in the book that is not in the series, but I don't expect the series to replace the book. The series manages to bring out the humane story of these women as they struggled to survive and as they showed their love in an era of horrible prosecution by Romans who were only hungry for power and ego. These are people who only wanted to live in peace but were disallowed to have a normal life. I love the fact that the filmmakers didn't overdo the violence and action and focused more on the characters, and well yes on the love-making scenes.

Not worthy of the effort to produce it

[glennabello · 1/10 · 3 April 2015]

I tuned into "The Dovekeepers" to see a historically accurate depiction of the Siege of Masada. What it turned out to be was one of the most insipid and juvenile presentations on TV this year. Not only was the acting superficial and the screen writing not worthy of even a bad high school play, but the story of this clinker was largely fantasy and left the viewer with a migraine.

Cote de Pablo continues to sound like Ziva David (from NCIS) and I fully expected (actually hoped) that DiNozzo and Gibbs would helicopter in and rescue her from any further self-humiliation and torture of the audience. The only possible device that was added to grab a few viewers might be the steamy scenes in the local bath, but even those had little context as to the Siege of Masada, which should have been the actual historical event as written by Flavius Josephus from commentaries of Roman commanders present during the conflict. Instead, the writers choose to focus their attention on a novel (i.e., fictional account) of two women confirming Josephus' account. This miniseries was more applicable to a soap opera than good theater.

"The Dovekeepers" is just one more example of why good, thought-provoking TV should be left to the BBC.

Charactars Brought To Life

[christostreak · 10/10 · 24 April 2015]

Despite all the bad comments on this film, I think it was excellent. I haven't read the book and it inspired me to order the book. Many complaints about the Masada but nobody actually knew how it look liked 2000 thousand years ago. I think this leaves you with a beautiful imagination to how it really was, and you can think of this film after-wards with more violence and more brutal suffering and more sex and more drama. Today all over the world we are still struggling with immigrants, Xenophobia, and Isis. The craving for power never stopped. This was a good summary of a bad tragedy that we are seeing on the news today. Very well played in a mannered way. Vibrant colors and scenery throughout the film. Good Story in general. And most certainly a DVD that I would own and watch again when I need to be inspired.

Horrible insult to history

[chancellorethrilpalpatine · 1/10 · 3 April 2015]

I wish we could offer a -10 on the rating. Don't waste your time if you're looking for something even mildly close to what we know from history. There were so many mistakes. The authors failed to research anything. People from this time period not only wanted freedom, they were devout Jews following a very conservative lifestyle and belief. Infidelity would have never happened. Sex with slaves would never have happened. They lived communally and shared almost everything. When they met their end, there wasn't a shouts or screams, they understood what they faced if the Romans took them alive. Crucifixion. Every man, woman and child would die on a cross.

Besides a few names, the Roman 10th, and the fact that this happened at Masada, they didn't get much right. It's an insult and CBS should be forced to apologias to the entire Jewish community for this insult.

Beautifully filmed, but terrible

[jhallnv · 2/10 · 6 April 2015]

Really the only good thing about this film was the visuals. Everything else about it was just terrible. This movie was in essence a women's romance novel set during biblical times. The film hardly hold up to Judea/Christian values though. The two main women in the movie sleep with every man they meet. This is unacceptable in our time, but in this time in history they would have been killed for it. To add insult to injury they also practice witchcraft. No one ever seems to question any of this behavior though, and everyone acts like this is perfectly normal. I never did watch the second night. It was so terrible I could not bear another night of this trash. The characters are empty, and wooden. The men are all hunky (right off the cover of a romance novel). Do yourself a favor and skip this. Your brain will thank you for it.

Should get 5 stars as a comedy!

[fluffnpuff · 1/10 · 26 April 2015]

Quite a hilarious show. Great drama with women in beautiful colorful gowns and full make up sweeping across the desert, remaining beautiful and clean under unbelievable circumstances. Brutish, muscled men at ever turn (muscles compliments of their local health clubs I'm sure). The sets were so staged it was painful, the love scenes so dramatic they are laughable. Cote de Pablo should have stuck with NCIS. I have lived in many third world countries and all I could think about is what those people would have smelled like and what they really would have looked like. I plead ignorance to that period of history but I doubt this film was a true representation of ANYTHING and found it a real insult to their viewers.

Racist & Slutty

[VimalaNowlis · 3/10 · 6 April 2015]

I loved "The Red Tent" and really looked forward to the story of Masada from the women's point of view. But this show is so disappointing as it shows nothing but re-affirming the ancient Judaim prejudice of self- righteous myopic racism that only the Jews are the chosen people and everyone else is scum and not entitled to live much less any consideration.

This show made no concession that anyone else could possibly be right except those in the Masada and no other view is allowed because the freedom-fighters are exempt from any criticism. When they kill the Romans, it's justified. When the Romans kill them, it's atrocity. Unfortunately, one minority group's patriots are another people's terrorists. The only modern people who can still accept the premise of this show is the ultra-conservative-Zionists.

However, if this concept is allowed the Zionists, why not the Muslim Terrorists who are the latest incarnation of the most terrifying and revolting aspects of the bigoted Judeo/Christian/Islam religious tradition? Shouldn't they be allowed to use the same arguments and the same rules as the new "freedom-fighters"?

What about the Palestinians? The Jews went into Canaan when it was already occupied. The Palestinians were there long before the Jews and continued to be there before the "return" of the Jews. If the Romans were wrong for invading and conquering Judea, what about the Jews for invading and conquering Palestine and massacring everyone who were there before and for walling-off those there are there now?

And what's with those women? Can't wait to sleep with the first good- looking man they see? Just because they are "in love", they selfishly dived in with eyes closed. It doesn't matter who they hurt because love excuses everything? It doesn't matter who they use or betray because they are in love? Absolutely ridiculous!

And poison the water of the Roman camp? How did the Jews like it when the Christians used to accuse them of doing the same in Europe? Now it's "heroic" when a Jewish woman did it? Killing by any means should be permitted because it's done by a Jewish woman?

How shallow is the writer and the producer? They need to look in the mirror first before they accuse others for what they are doing and they should looking around twice before taking sides.

I give the show a rating of "3" because the costume is nice, the color scheme is pleasant, and the set seems authentic. But I don't think I can stomach watching the rest of the show.

Tragic beyond words

[mdeangelisarapsali · 10/10 · 1 April 2015]

One of the saddest things I have ever seen in my life. I had to hide my eyes a lot of the time, it was so bloody, but I kept on watching to see the end. Gripping, heart-wrenching. Can't imagine buying it though - who could watch it again? I had never heard of this story, and am still not quite sure of where it fits in history, but it is one that deserves to be told. The women especially are incredible, poised, strong, full of emotion. What actors! So much romance struck me as not quite true to the period, but who knows? I specially liked how the mocking 'Jewish traitor' who was taking their story down was in the end almost struck dumb by the conclusion of their tale. Very powerful story, not for the fainthearted, or those with weak stomachs unless you hide for the many bloody parts, as I did.

Propaganda

[blueriverstones · 1/10 · 1 April 2015]

Just another TV show to sway American sympathies to Zionist Israel. Using the bible stories to 'beat the drum' for the poor Jewish people, to take away attention from the treatment of Palestinians now by Israel. We are not all naive. The acting is poor. It is demeaning toward woman, even if partially true to tale, it portrays women as home breakers who would sleep around. Sam Neal seems oddly miscast as a Jewish roman. The one star is for the geology of Masada. It was very odd that only certain women wore colorful clothing, everyone else wore drab brown. There were never people around to observe the stolen kisses and trysts.

loved it, thank you Roma and Mark and company/cast!

[sonshine-57581 · 10/10 · 2 April 2015]

Thank you Roma and Mark -beats all the garbage on TV, we can't hardly watch regular TV anymore, let alone cable ,too much trash. looking forward to much more Christian centered, bible stories, thank you for your conviction, God bless! The acting was good and I personally love the historical info. We need more clean, positive programs on TV or we may give it up, just watch our movies and read books. We could all use more history. Interesting how the same problems are going on in mankind, we just don't really change as humans, same old issues, ironic how so much of what is going on in the world now, was going on back in 70 ad, we love learning more of ancient Middle East history/stories, helps us to understand the evolution of cultures and societies.We Americans need to learn more history of here and the world....or may be destined to keep repeating it........

Absolutely terrible

[rayres0708 · 2/10 · 2 July 2015]

The book that this is supposed to be based on is really good. It gives the story of Masada through the narrative of 4 different women. This miniseries, however, is crap. Several major characters are left out, and those that are depicted aren't even developed well. The casting is mediocre. They could have done a lot better.

Some reviewers don't like the "morals" of the story. If they had actually followed the book, these uptight people wouldn't have been as offended at least. In the book, Eleazar and Shirah are secretly married. Shirah is called the Witch of Moab, yet she is really nothing more than an herbalist. Yael and Ben-Simon's relationship is an example of how women were pretty powerless at that time. So cool your jets! I am a Christian and I found this story (in the book) moving. Some people just take themselves too seriously.

Maybe someday a studio will give this story the treatment it deserves!

It was OK. Knowing the history and Actually visited the site in 2007 helped

[helenlw · 20 May 2015]

I saw the movie then read the book. Not the same. In the movie Shirah lives she is still pregnant when found by Roman soldiers. In the book she gives birth to her daughter and gives the baby to Yael. Her lover and father of her baby slits her throat and then kills him self. Yael in the book says at the end when found by Roman soldiers says she is Shirah. Was disappointed that more of the history that is told in the book wasn't mentioned in the movie. There is a lot of history here. A lot of terrible things happened to the Jewish people. I went to Isreal in 2007 and went up to Masada and visited Herod's fortress. Knowing something about the history helped in understanding the story. The book was a little confusing at times, but it was more interesting because of the history mentioned.